At 9:21 PM -0400 6/2/04, David Mertz wrote:
>On Jun 2, 2004, at 8:01 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:
>>Barcodes are also more reliable than OCR.
>
>I find this claim unlikely if we are talking about OCR fonts like
>OCR-A. At the least it is not supportable without some empirical
>evidence. Strong counter-evidence is provided by the banking
>industry, who process literally billions of checks every day, with
>extremely low error rates, using OCR fonts.
Banks use MICR not straight OCR. That's Magnetic Ink. And the MICR
encoding is more redundant that straight OCR is.
Best regards,
Arthur
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303-4507 tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424 ================================================================== = The content of this message, with the exception of any external = quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain ==================================================================Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:04 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT